Filed under: EV/Plug-in, Lotus, Zap
Zap-X, a normal electric car, "months" away?
The product of the Zap-Lotus agreement, the Zap-X, a normal looking, electric, four door sedan, just might be "months" away from mass production. China.org.cn is reporting China's Youngman Automotive Group, the guys making the car for Zap, said they could deliver a test car to Zap by the end of this year and after testing by Zap, the sedan could go into mass production as little as two months later. Here is the quote:
"The sample vehicles will be finished at the end of this year or next January. Two or three months after testing, the electric-powered sedan under the Lotus brand will be the first to go into mass production."
Zap has not announced a release date (surprise!) but if things go as Youngman hopes, the Zap-APX could have a release date of Summer 2008; the earliest release date that we know of for any of the new, normal electric cars like the Miles Javlon. While a summer release date would give Zap the honor of being first to market with a normal electric car, the price and range are the more complicated issues. They have not given a price and the range is said to be 350 miles.
Whatever the release, price and range, the Zap-X looks like it will be an amazing car, should it ever be more than vaporware: in-wheel electric motors by PML FlightLink, a top speed of 155 mph, and 0 to 60 MPH in 4.8 seconds. While, I don't think anyone expects all of that to remain true, for an affordable car anyway, I am glad to hear that things are at least currently on track on Youngman's end for the Zap-APX. AutoblogGreen remains skeptical, as you know.
Gallery: Lotus APX concept
[Source: China.org.cn and tipster Domenick]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Kardax 1:02PM (10/12/2007)
I think it's theoretically possible for a prototype ZAP-X to be built in the next couple of months, but there are a number of hurdles to actually selling it in the U.S. The $200,000 battery system, for example.
Delivering to customers by Summer 2008 seems impossible to me. Phoenix Motorcars is far ahead of ZAP in making a similar vehicle, but progress is slow, at best.
Reply
Phil L. 1:39PM (10/12/2007)
Building the car - and certifying it for sale in the US - are two entirely different things. The cost of designing a car to pass a crash test - and then paying for the test - are big hurdles. And these steps take longer than a few months.
That said, I would welcome a "normal" 4-door, 4+ passenger EV sedan on the US market. I can't consider it unless it's family affordable - but a successful, broad-market EV will create a competitive market that will expand choices and push costs down.
Reply
kent beuchert 1:53PM (10/12/2007)
The main issue will be price, which I expect to be above $75,000. That makes it unlikely to sell widely or have any effect on much of anything. Practical electric batteries for an all-electric are still not available. Even if it gets 5 miles per kWhr, that battery pack can't possibly cost less than $40,000. It will, however, be, unlike the Tesla, a viable car, once high capacity charging stations are available, whenever that might be.
Reply
Seth 2:13PM (10/12/2007)
Um, why does the car in these photos have exhaust pipes? And where's the photos of the electric motor and batteries? The engine compartment looks like it has some kind of combustion engine in it. I guess the top thing could be an electric motor, but it looks more like a supercharger. And what are the giant metal things in there that look like the cylinder part of an engine block? And, if the electric motors are in the hubs, what's all that junk in there? Shouldn't it just be batteries and power control? I don't think that kind of stuff needs heavy cooling and lubricating, does it?
I guess this couldn't really be a standard motor, since the air intake seems to channel directly into the firewall. Hm. I'd like to see more details (specs, etc.) before accepting this as an electric car.
Reply
Seth 2:20PM (10/12/2007)
Heh heh. Never mind. After close analysis of the text, it becomes obvious that this gallery is of the sedan that the Zap-APX is supposed to be based on, the actual electric version won't even have samples for a couple months. Still, would be nice if you called that out specifically to avoid confusion. :)
Reply
Lascelles Linton 2:40PM (10/12/2007)
Phil, It's based on the Lotus, which I guess is legal in the states, so it might already have passed crashed tests. Anyone reading this knows if changing the engine requires a new crash test?
Reply
Kardax 3:08PM (10/12/2007)
Lascelles Linton:
The Lotus APX is just a concept car; Lotus hasn't gone though NHTSA certification process.
Even if they did, the all-new drivetrain, with the different weight and chemistry characteristics of switching from gasoline to a large battery pack would definitely require re-certification.
NHTSA certification presents a huge problem for any small company. You have to build and destroy a number of vehicles. Then you have to fix the problems, and build and destroy more vehicles. This costs millions of dollars to do. ZAP simply doesn't have that kind of money, Lotus isn't really that interested, so it's up to Youngman to decide if it's worth the effort and expense.
Blame Ralph Nader's 1965 book "Unsafe at Any Speed" for this hassle :)
Reply
Phil L. 3:33PM (10/12/2007)
Lotus currently sells only the Elise and Exige in the US. I'll presume Zap is counting on Lotus footing much of the regulatory certification costs for the chassis. But if the APX is still at concept stage, I'm not sure what Zap plans to do in just a few months.
Kardax brings up a good point: How much more certification really does need to be done when an EV is based on an existing design?
The Tesla is based on the Elise - but I believe they stretched the chassis a couple inches, in addition to the drivetrain-related modifications. Did they still have to crash-test a Tesla, even though the Elise had already done it?
Reply
kert 4:19PM (10/12/2007)
;;Practical electric batteries for an all-electric are still not available.
Uh .. they have been available for years, for different values of the word "practical" and "available"
EV1 and RAV4EV were entirely practical. So are Mitubishi MiEV, Subaru R1E and Nissan Mixim prototypes. Tesla fits the definition of "practical" for some as well.
Look, the batteries have always been there, , with various engineering tradeoffs you can build better or worse EVs. With new breed of Lithium phosphate and titanate batteries we are well into "entirely practical for most of the population" territory already. How long do we need to wait ?
Reply
Kardax 4:20PM (10/12/2007)
Although the Tesla Roadster employs a lot of Lotus Elise technology and parts, it's really its own thing and has had to go through crash testing. I think at least 8 prototypes were sacrificed in this process.
Lotus has never given any indication that they'll bring the APX to market, so they won't provide financial support for this project. It's up to ZAP and Youngman to figure out how to pay for it.
Note that NHTSA approval is _not_ necessary to build a concept car. There's nothing stopping ZAP from throwing a few hub motors and a battery pack into an APX today and parading it around at auto shows.
Reply
Phil L. 4:39PM (10/12/2007)
kert -
Perhaps it'd be better to say something like:
"Batteries for a mass-market sedan at mass-market prices are not yet available"
The key is the marketplace. Two-seat cars are neat, but they will never make up the bulk of world auto sales. There will always be those who will buy expensive, exclusive vehicles - but it will still be just a sliver of the market.
I liked the EV-1 - but I wouldn't have been able to afford it, and two seats doesn't cut it for me (I have three kids, all still in car seats). I still like looking at the occasional used RAV4EV that shows up on eBay - but I can't afford $50K for any car, let alone a used one with questionable long-term support issues.
So I think it's still too early to claim the battery problem has been completely solved.
Still, I see hope for the immediate future. Technology and other issues are coming together to create an environment more conducive for practical, affordable EVs. We're closer than we ever have been before.
Reply
Alex Campbell 6:58PM (10/12/2007)
This situation is evolving very quickly because Youngman is already a very large manufacturing company with plans to move into automobiles. Timetable projections will not be confirmed until the JV business plans between ZAP and Youngman have been further developed. The ZAP-X is on the agenda with many other vehicles being planned for rollout.
With all the questions whether this joint venture has the capacity to bring these vehicles to completion, some due diligence on Youngman will show they are a sleeping giant.
~ Alex Campbell, ZAP
Reply
Lascelles Linton 7:07PM (10/12/2007)
Kardax, I just had an interesting thought. Maybe it's not a car at all and does not need crash tests? It uses in wheel motors. Maybe it could pass as a bike :D Anyone reading this know of a street legal car with the motor in the wheel?
Reply
Andrew Grin 9:36PM (10/12/2007)
Very cool car but safety testing by the NTSC takes months (as we saw by tesla) and no where in this do I see any room for that.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 12:41AM (10/13/2007)
The EV1 was not practical. It was a two-seater. That and the short range meant it could really only be a 2nd car for most people.
So now you're really talking about a two-car family. And you need to put a 220V charger in your garage to the tune of a few thousand dollars.
So that means anyone who can't deal with two seats in one of their cars is out (most families).
Anyone who needs long range on both their cars (few) is out.
Anyone who can't modify their garage or doesn't have a garage (renters) are out.
The RAV4EV was closer to practical, although it was very expensive, has a $25,000 battery pack in it, has a range of 100 miles and no replacement battery packs are currently available.
As to the Tesla being practical, you are clearly joking. It's $100K.
This Zap-X must be a lead-acid design if it is to be at all affordable. Even a NiMH pack with that range would be $30K, a LIon would be far more.
Reply
Kardax 12:57AM (10/13/2007)
Alex Campbell: Thanks for the insider perspective :) I'm curious what sort of role ZAP plans to take in the joint venture. Will ZAP just manage the dealer network and let Youngman figure out manufacturing?
Lascelles Linton: The regulations don't talk about wheel motors at all. Just wheel count and top speed. If you have 4 wheels and can go faster than 25, full NHTSA regulations apply. The end.
Reply
Ernie 3:46AM (10/13/2007)
This car has been hardcore vapourware for a while now, and I think it's just the last gasp of a stock market scam. After these promises are broken, the CEO(s) will likely be suddenly unavailable on vacation in some country with a warm climate and no extradition treaty with the US. It's obviously all about creating buzz to siphon capital out of clueless investors. The claims they make are monumentally impossible.
I'd *really* like to believe that they're telling the truth, but I so very highly doubt it.
Reply
BlackbirdHighway 8:03AM (10/13/2007)
Tesla had a much more reasonable timetable, and even that proved to be way to aggressive. It"s some sort of tradition with car companies to announce widely optomistic predictions, then fail to follow through. There is absolutely no chance that the Volt will be available in 2010. Anyone remember predictions of thousands of hydrogen cars on the road by - 2007? They are still 5 years away, and will always be 5 years away.
If Tesla actually meets their new production schedule then they will be one of the very, very few to actually come through with actual product. We certainly won't see the ZAP-X next year, and quite possibly never will. I'm still not convinced that we will ever see the Volt either. Car companies big and small love to talk big, then fail to deliver.
Reply
DC 12:11PM (10/13/2007)
As everyone here knows, Zap's survival is based on selling stock not selling cars. With stock shares have never been a good investment, the only way to sell stock is with more announcements that grab the attention of naive but goodhearted people.
I know everyone here wants to be optimistic, but why is this company even news? How many people's life savings has been wasted on their stock to keep this company afloat?
All plans for the Brazilian made Obvio that ABG has written many times about are dead. Where's the press release announcing that?
Reply
Domenick 3:51PM (10/13/2007)
Sometimes it's hard to tell if I'm reading a car blog or the "Skeptical Enquirer". Nobody's product could ever possibly achieve it's claims and most manufactures are out to rip people off. If it's not "too much unsprung weight" in in-wheel motors, it's a stock "pump and dump" scheme. Yet, products get developed and released, often later than originally claimed maybe, (I love to see that Obvio too) but some stuff does get to market.
My point? I'm not sure, but it may have something to do with the disparaging tones on display. And patience.
Reply